Urban–rural disparity of social vulnerability to natural hazards in Australia

Assessing vulnerability to natural hazards is at the heart of hazard risk reduction. However, many countries such as Australia lack measuring systems to quantity vulnerability for hazard risk evaluation. Drawing on 41 indicators from multiple data sources at the finest spatial unit of the Australian census, we re-forged the Cutter’s classic vulnerability measuring framework by involving the ‘4D’ quantification of built environment (diversity, design, density and distance), and constructed the first nationwide fine-grained measures of vulnerability for urban and rural locales, respectively. Our measures of vulnerability include five themes—(1) socioeconomic status; (2) demographics and disability; (3) minority and languages; (4) housing characteristics; and (5) built environment—that were further used to assess the inequality of vulnerability to three widely affected natural hazards in Australia (wildfires, floods, and earthquakes). We found the inequality of vulnerability in the affected areas of the three hazards in eight capital cities are more significant than that of their rural counterparts. The most vulnerable areas in capital cities were peri-urban locales which must be prioritised for hazard adaptation. Our findings contribute to the risk profiling and sustainable urban–rural development in Australia, and the broad understanding of place-based risk reduction in South Hemisphere.